Oh jeez, what did I do now? - Page 2

Godfather80 · #11 03-04-2006, 12:45 AM

No, no, your instincts were correct. Mine weren't. I was expecting a slowplayed suited connector 2 pair (87 specifically). Well, I had the hand type right, but my guess was a little low.

Villain shows 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] for the flopped straight.

I'm still not sure about my river check-raise, but I have been trying to get more value out of rivers of late. I wonder whether this was a river to go for more value on considering my read on villain and that hearts never came in.

CrdShrk6 · #12 03-04-2006, 12:45 AM

Well, on the river you should have just called. I doubt MP1 has T9 or he would have flopped a straight. i doubt he would have tooken a chance and checked on the river. Thats too risky of a move unless he put you on a monster. I think he is on a bluff. Maybe he made a King on the river. Its possible, since he is a loose player he called you on the flop with KT because he would have a gutshot.He played the hand like he was on the come, not like he was protecting a good hand. So i put him on KT, or a bluff. you are not beat. i would call.

Isura · #13 03-04-2006, 12:45 AM

[ QUOTE ]

My read on most of these 25NL LAGs is that they get real skittish about showing strenngth after somebody else has shown strength. So, I thought that I was more likely to get a crying call from my check-minraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't a check/raise show more strength than leading? Because if your read is correct, you are in big trouble when he 3-bets the river.

Godfather80 · #14 03-04-2006, 12:48 AM

I understood that when he pushed (this is why I said I wasn't excited to see him push), but pot odds dictated a call anyway at that point.

CrdShrk6 · #15 03-04-2006, 12:50 AM

I doubt this loose player is capable of reading that his opponent has an unfoldable hand. I dont think this loose player will risk check raising on the river. It doesnt make sense. He will be afraid of his opponent checking behind him.

Godfather80 · #16 03-04-2006, 12:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I doubt this loose player is capable of reading that his opponent has an unfoldable hand. I dont think this loose player will risk check raising on the river. It doesnt make sense. He will be afraid of his opponent checking behind him.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't really think you've read the hand well. Villain is in position. Hero is OOP and acting first. There is no way Villain can check-raise on the river.

CrdShrk6 · #17 03-04-2006, 01:17 AM

I see.

Godfather80 · #18 03-04-2006, 01:21 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I see.

[/ QUOTE ]

But, do you see why? [img]/images/graemlins/ooo.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Simplistic · #19 03-04-2006, 01:42 AM

I would have check/called. check raising is kinda meh here. so your intent was to check/raise for value here? if you're going to check raise for value just push.

Godfather80 · #20 03-04-2006, 01:46 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I would have check/called. check raising is kinda meh here. so your intent was to check/raise for value here? if you're going to check raise for value just push.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I was check-raising for value because I thought there was a decent chance that villain would call me with a worse two-pair. Perhaps my thinking is flawed here, but I think that there are times when a villain will call a min-checkraise, but will not call a checkraise push. I was hoping for a crying call from a villain who does not like calling. My thought was that he might find a fold with his two-pair if I pushed because this type hates calling. I was attempting to "soften the blow" of having to call.

It backfired anyway, but the theoretical implications of my attempt are important to me.